The EU Court of Justice has upheld the European Commission's classification of nuclear energy and natural gas as climate-friendly investments under the EU taxonomy, dismissing Austria's legal challenge.

Austria's government expressed regret over the ruling, maintaining that nuclear power is not environmentally sustainable and that fossil gas should only play a temporary role in the energy transition.

This decision reflects ongoing disagreements within the EU, where some member states support including gas and nuclear in climate strategies, while others oppose them, citing safety and sustainability concerns.

The ruling has been described as very regrettable by critics and environmental groups, who warn it could hinder investments in renewable energy and prolong reliance on fossil fuels and nuclear power.

Austria is considering further legal action, including possibly appealing the decision to the European Court of Justice, although previous similar cases have been dismissed.

In Spain, the CEO of Iberdrola suggested that the country should reconsider planned nuclear plant closures between 2027 and 2035 to maintain system stability.

Critics, such as German MEP Markus Ferber, argued that the court's decision lacked a solid scientific basis and called for correction from the EU’s highest court.

Austria's climate minister called for an immediate appeal, emphasizing the need to prioritize renewable energy sources over nuclear and fossil gas.

Previous legal challenges, including a 2023 case by a German MEP, have also been dismissed, highlighting the court's stance on the limits of national or individual challenges to EU classifications.

The court noted that, given the EU's climate targets to cut emissions by 55% by 2030 and reach climate neutrality by 2050, there are insufficient alternatives like wind and solar at the necessary scale.

Environmental groups like Greenpeace criticized the ruling, warning it could divert investments away from renewables and extend reliance on nuclear and fossil fuels.

The 2022 decision by the European Commission to include gas and nuclear faced opposition from green campaigners and within its own ranks, citing safety and waste management concerns.

The court clarified that the European Commission is not responsible for considering the entire lifecycle of uranium or related risks, focusing instead on the classification's technical criteria.